ATM Challenges Public Protector’s Refusal to Probe Illicit Financial Flows
The African Transformation Movement (ATM) has mounted a legal challenge against Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka following her refusal to investigate allegations of illicit financial flows linked to President Cyril Ramaphosa and the controversial Phala Phala farm scandal.
In papers filed with the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria, the ATM accuses the Public Protector of failing to act on credible allegations and of adopting what it calls a “closed and biased mindset” in her refusal to investigate the matter.
ATM Alleges Failure to Act on Serious Claims
The ATM’s leader, Vuyo Zungula, argues that Gcaleka ignored key aspects of the case, including allegations that large sums of undeclared foreign currency—reportedly $580,000—entered and exited South Africa illegally following the alleged sale of game animals at the president’s Limpopo farm.
Central to the ATM’s grievance is that Gcaleka:
- Failed to subpoena key witnesses, including the farm manager and the housekeeper who discovered the cash;
- Did not seek SARS tax records for President Ramaphosa, even after a court ruling in the Arena Holdings case made it legally permissible;
- Dismissed allegations without sufficient investigation, citing overlaps with other bodies like the Hawks and SARS;
- Relied heavily on Ramaphosa’s denials while disregarding potentially crucial testimony and financial trails.
The party says the refusal undermines transparency and accountability and has requested the court to declare Gcaleka’s decision unconstitutional and irrational.
Public Protector Defends Her Stance
Advocate Gcaleka has maintained that her office acted within the bounds of the law, stating that certain aspects of the ATM’s allegations fall outside her jurisdiction—particularly those involving tax and foreign exchange violations. She further argued that the ATM failed to provide sufficient evidence to warrant an official investigation.
In her findings, Gcaleka concluded that the allegations were largely speculative and based on hearsay. Her report cleared the president of wrongdoing, a position that ATM has fiercely rejected.
Court Challenge Underway
ATM is seeking relief under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA), arguing that the Public Protector’s refusal was procedurally unfair and irrational. The party has asked the court to:
- Set aside the Public Protector’s decision,
- Compel her to launch a full investigation, and
- Award legal costs against her office.
This is not the first time the ATM has clashed with Gcaleka. In 2023, the party filed a similar challenge against her handling of the initial Phala Phala investigation, alleging bias and failure to conduct a thorough inquiry.
The High Court is expected to hear the case later this year.